It was late June 2022 when the U.S. along with its North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) members put Russia on top of the list of threats and designated it as the “most significant and direct threat” to its members’ peace and security. According to NATO’s January Strategic Concept of January 2024, Russia poses the most significant threat to the safety of the Allies and the stability of the Euro-Atlantic region. It also argues that ‘coercion, subversion, and assault are all means by which Russia seeks to govern other nations and create spheres of influence.
It is not very arduous to understand that the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 ignited the preexisting perception of the Western countries of Russia with a new stimulus. However, since then the NATO-led countries have been increasingly warning Russia and seem to be under pressure to increase defense spending in response to new evaluations of Russia’s military might and the perils it poses to NATO security. In addition, the defense budgets of European NATO member states have grown by about one-third in the last decade, with several countries boosting their budgets substantially in response to Russia’s military attack. In a similar vein, a British military official stated that the ‘NATO countries are living in extremely perilous times [and] at a stage when large-scale violence is more probable than it has been in recent history.’
On the contrary, some recent statements made by the Secretary General of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg at a press conference and Munich Security Conference imply that there is ‘no NATO partner is under immediate threat from Russia.” He added that NATO, of course, does keep a careful eye on Russia and they were more vigilant and present in the eastern portion of the alliance lines, but their goal was to prevent an assault on a NATO partner. However, apart from these pensile viewpoints that go through ups and downs based on the intense environment of politics, there is a common perception in the scholarship of the West that regards Russia as a stiff threat to the West that cannot be tamed shortly. However, the relationship between Russia and the West has not always been so tough and rough! To investigate the dynamics, we cannot but recall some historical developments that drove the trajectory of the rapport.
Historical Background
In the early 20th century, Russia and the nations that would later form NATO maintained relatively amicable relations. Russia, then the Soviet Union, was a member of the Allied Powers during World War I and World War II, fighting alongside many future NATO countries against common adversaries. The post-war period saw the Soviet Union and Western allies collaborate within the United Nations and other international organizations, signaling a degree of cooperation on global issues. However, the onset of the Cold War in the late 1940s marked a significant shift in the relationship. The ideological divide between the capitalist West and the communist Soviet bloc led to the formation of NATO in 1949, a military alliance initially aimed at deterring Soviet expansionism in Europe. Throughout the Cold War, NATO and the Soviet Union engaged in an arms race, proxy wars, and confrontational rhetoric, with both sides perceiving the other as a threat to their respective security, ideology, and interests.
The relationship between the Russian Federation and NATO countries, however, has fluctuated significantly over the past century, transitioning from inimical rapport during the hotbed of Cold War politics to a détente and strategically sound relationship during and post-Gorbachev era. Despite these tensions, the late 20th century witnessed periods of détente and improved relations. The Helsinki Accords of 1975 established principles for cooperation and security in Europe, and the 1990 Charter of Paris for a New Europe heralded a commitment to shared values and a vision of a Europe “whole and free.” When the Cold War ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, there were hopes in the West of forging a cooperative partnership with a reformed Russia.
Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia initially sought closer ties with the West, joining the Group of Eight (G8) industrialized nations in 1997 and establishing cooperative frameworks with NATO, such as the NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997 and the NATO-Russia Council in 2002. These visions inspired proposals within the Clinton and Bush administrations to eventually offer Russia membership in NATO itself—an idea that was entertained, if ultimately rejected, by figures like former Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott. There was optimism that Russia, despite its diminished power and lingering resentments, would gradually be “Westernized” by deepening interdependence.
However, this period of relative rapprochement was short-lived. While the 1990s saw early cooperation between Russia and NATO on select issues like counter-terrorism and regional peacekeeping operations, the fundamental dynamics quickly turned discordant. What began as an attempt at partnership and cooperation in the 1990s quickly devolved into deep mistrust, rivalry, and conflict as diverging interests and threat perceptions came to the fore. These strains set the stage for the roller-coaster dynamics that came to define NATO-Russia relations in the decades that followed—alternating periods of escalating tensions, tenuous resets and dialogue initiatives, and renewed ruptures. Key flashpoints included NATO’s campaigns in the Balkans, the 2008 Russia-Georgia War, the alliance’s expansion into former Soviet territories, the conflict in Ukraine in 2014, and the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war since the 24th of February 2022.
Economic Might of Russia: Enough to Pose Threat?
Russia’s economic power and its potential impact on NATO is a complex and multifaceted issue. On one hand, Russia’s economy has experienced significant challenges in recent years, with stagnant growth, overdependence on energy export revenue, and structural weaknesses exacerbated by Western sanctions after the commencement of the Ukraine war in 2022. Since the start of the conflict in Ukraine, Western nations have imposed a total of 16,500 sanctions on persons and businesses in Russia. As of February 12th, this data comes from Castellum.AI, the system that keeps tabs on sanctions online. Of the many sanctions placed on Russia, 3,500 were levied by the United States, 2,700 by Canada, 2,400 by Switzerland, 1,700 by the European Union, and 1,700 by the United Kingdom. Along with the introduction of 500 new restrictions by the US, the European Union also announced its thirteenth round of penalties against Russia.
In this regard, Global financial institutions like the World Bank, the IMF, and the OECD all agree that Russia’s economy had a rough 2022 with a 2.1% decline in Russia’s GDP. Moreover, per the estimation of World Economics, with almost ten times Russia’s GDP, as of March 2024, NATO countries combined possess more than $54 trillion economy in Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) terms while Russia has only a $6 trillion economy (Figure-1). These economic vulnerabilities could limit Russia’s ability to project power and influence on a global scale, potentially mitigating any threat it might pose to NATO.
Figure 1: NATO’s combined economy is far larger than Russia’s
Since the Ukraine war started, there have been major restrictions on the export of vital goods, including technology and spare parts, and the freezing of over $300 billion in assets held by the Russian Central Bank and other large Russian institutions. Even though it had difficulties, intriguingly, Russia’s economy grew 3.6% in 2023, surpassing both Europe and the U.S. Officials and analysts had predicted its collapse. The Atlantic Council analysis shows that after the invasion in February 2022, commerce has expanded with several nations, including some members of the European Union and NATO.
However, Russia’s strategic economic resources and its willingness to leverage them as instruments of national power cannot be discounted. As one of the world’s largest producers and exporters of oil and natural gas, Russia retains considerable influence over energy markets and the ability to disrupt supply chains. This “energy weapon” has been wielded by Russia in the past, including during disputes with Ukraine and other European nations, and could be used to exert pressure on NATO members that rely heavily on Russian energy imports. Russia’s pursuit of economic self-reliance through import substitution, domestic production, and the development of indigenous technologies also carries implications for NATO. While these efforts have yielded mixed results thus far, a more resilient and self-sufficient Russian economy could bolster its ability to withstand economic pressure and sanctions from the West, thereby reducing the effectiveness of these tools in shaping Russian behavior.
In evaluating Russia’s economic might and its potential threat to NATO, it is essential to consider the nuances and complexities within this multifaceted domain. While Russia’s economic challenges and vulnerabilities may limit its ability to project power on a global scale, its strategic resources, financial leverage, and efforts toward economic self-reliance, combined with its willingness to use economic instruments for geopolitical gain, cannot be discounted as potential sources of influence and pressure on NATO member states.
Geopolitical Aspects
Russia’s geopolitical position and ambitions also play a significant role in assessing its potential threat to NATO. As the world’s largest country by landmass, spanning across Eurasia, Russia occupies a strategically vital territory that provides it with a unique geopolitical advantage. Its vast territory encompasses various climatic zones, abundant natural resources, and access to multiple oceans, enabling it to project influence across multiple regions. According to Statista, the value of Russia’s natural resource assets is $75 trillion (Figure 2). Coal, petroleum, natural gas, gold, wood, and rare earth metals are all a part of this sum.
Figure 2: Worth of natural resources of different countries (Source: Statista)
Moreover, Russia’s historical and cultural ties with former Soviet republics and Warsaw Pact countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia also grant it a degree of influence within its “near abroad.” Through economic, political, and military cooperation, Russia has sought to maintain a sphere of privileged interests in this region, sometimes conflicting with the interests and aspirations of NATO members and partners. However, Russia’s interventions in Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2014, as well as its support for separatist movements in eastern Ukraine, can be viewed as attempts to reassert its influence and prevent further NATO encroachment into territories it considers within its geopolitical orbit. These actions have demonstrated Russia’s willingness to use force to protect its perceived interests, raising concerns among NATO members about the potential for similar interventions in other neighboring countries.
Furthermore, Russia’s involvement in regional conflicts and its cultivation of partnerships with states that challenge Western interests, such as Syria, Iran, and Venezuela, have added to the perception of Russia as a geopolitical competitor to NATO. By projecting power in regions like the Middle East and Latin America, Russia has sought to counterbalance Western influence and establish itself as a global player capable of shaping geopolitical outcomes.
Conversely, Russia’s geopolitical position also presents vulnerabilities that could moderate any threat it poses to NATO. Its vast territory and sprawling borders create significant challenges in terms of defense and security, requiring the allocation of substantial resources to maintain control and project power across multiple fronts. Additionally, Russia’s demographic challenges, including a declining population and an aging workforce, could limit its ability to sustain geopolitical ambitions in the long term. Russia’s geopolitical aspirations, by the way, also face constraints in the form of NATO’s collective defense commitments and the expansion of its membership. NATO’s enlargement, particularly the accession of former Warsaw Pact countries like Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic, has been perceived by Russia as an encroachment on its traditional sphere of influence and a threat to its security. However, this expansion has also strengthened NATO’s deterrence capabilities and its ability to project power and influence in regions neighboring Russia.
Military Capabilities of Russia
Russia’s military capabilities and modernization efforts are a central consideration in evaluating its potential threat to NATO. As a nuclear-armed power with one of the world’s largest and most technologically advanced military forces, Russia possesses formidable military capabilities as a great power. Russia’s strategic nuclear forces, comprising intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and long-range bombers, represent a significant deterrent and a potential threat to NATO member states. While the likelihood of a direct nuclear exchange between Russia and NATO remains low, the existence of these capabilities and the risk of escalation in times of crisis cannot be discounted.
As of 2023, according to Statista, there were over 3.36 million operational military troops in NATO, whereas the Russian military had 1.33 million. When compared to Russia, the combined military might of the 30 NATO member states is much stronger. NATO has 20,633 aircraft compared to 4,182 Russian aircraft, and 2,151 military ships compared to 598 Russian ships. On the other hand, with 12,566 main tanks for battle compared to 12,408, Russia’s battlefield vehicle fleet is more competitive. In comparison with Russia’s 5,977 nuclear weapons, the total nuclear weapons of the US, UK, and France came to 5,943.
Figure 3: NATO and Russia Military Comparison (Source: Statista)
Russia’s military exercises, often involving large-scale deployments and simulated scenarios near NATO borders, have raised concerns about its ability to rapidly mobilize and project force. These exercises, coupled with provocative actions in the air and maritime domains, such as incursions into NATO airspace and close encounters with NATO naval vessels, contribute to perceptions of Russia as a potential military threat. Furthermore, Russia’s interventions in conflicts like Syria and its support for separatist movements in Ukraine demonstrate its willingness to employ military force to achieve geopolitical objectives.
However, it is important to note that Russia’s military competencies also face significant constraints and challenges. Years of underinvestment following the collapse of the Soviet Union, coupled with demographic and economic challenges, have limited Russia’s ability to sustain a military force on par with NATO’s collective capabilities. Additionally, Russia’s reliance on aging equipment and infrastructure, as well as the impact of Western sanctions on its defense industry, have hampered its efforts to modernize and maintain technological parity with NATO. In terms of conventional forces, NATO’s collective military strength, combined with its integrated command structure, logistics capabilities, and interoperability, provide a substantial deterrent against potential Russian threat. NATO’s commitment to collective defense and its ability to rapidly deploy and sustain forces in response to threats contribute to the resilience of the alliance’s military posture.
In conclusion, while Russia’s actions in recent years, including its interventions in Georgia and Ukraine, its military modernization efforts, and its assertive foreign policy stance, have raised concerns within the NATO alliance, it is essential to recognize that the threat posed by Russia is not absolute or unidimensional. Russia faces significant economic, demographic, and technological constraints that limit its ability to project power on a global scale, and NATO’s collective defense commitments, combined with its military strength and diplomatic influence, provide a robust deterrent against potential Russian aggression. The relationship between Russia and NATO will continue to evolve, influenced by geopolitical shifts, economic dynamics, technological advancements, and the actions of political leaders on both sides. By embracing a nuanced and contextualized approach to assessing potential threats and opportunities, policymakers and analysts can navigate this complex terrain with greater insight and foresight, ultimately contributing to a more stable and secure international order.
